A Letter to A. A. Bogdanov and S. I. Gusev

Published:First published in 1925 in the magazineProletarskaya Revolutsia, No. 4 (39).

      Published according to the manuscript.Source:Lenin
	  Collected Works,

      Foreign Languages Publishing House,1962,

      Moscow,Volume 8,

      pages143-147.Translated:Bernard Isaacs and The Late Isidor LaskerTranscription\Markup:R. CymbalaPublic Domain:Lenin Internet Archive

      (2003).You may freely copy, distribute,
	display and perform this work; as well as make derivative and
	commercial works. Please credit “Marxists Internet
	Archive” as your source.•README

February11, 1905

Iwired my consent to your changes yesterday, although I emphatically do not
agree with what I could gather from your letter. But I am so sick of this
procrastination, and your questions seemed such a mockery, that I just gave it
up, thinking, If only they did something! If only they gave notice of the
Congress,any kind of notice, so long as theygaveit, instead
of just talking about it. You will be surprised at my use of the word
mockery. But just stop and think: two months ago I sent my draft toallmembers of the

			       Bureau.[1]Not one of them is interested in it or finds it necessary to discuss
it. And now—by wire.... A nice business:
we talk of organisation, of centralism, while actually there is such disunity,
such amateurism among even the closest comrades in the centre, that one feels
like chucking it all in disgust. Just look at the Bundists: they do not prate
about centralism, butevery oneof them writes to the centre weekly and
contact is thusactuallymaintained. You only have to pick up theirPosledniye Izvestia[2]to see this contact. We, however, here are
issuing the sixth number of yet one of our editors (Rakhmetov) has not written a
single line, either about or forVperyod.Our people
“talk” of extensive literary connections in St. Petersburg and in Moscow,
and of the Majority’s young forces, while we here,two monthsafter
the issuance of the call for collaboration (the announcement ofVperyodand a letter in connection with it), have seen or heard nothing
from them. The Russian committees(Caucasus, Nizhni-Novgorod, not to speak of the Volga region or the South)
      consider the Bureau a “myth”, and with perfect
      justification. We did “hear” from strangers about some sort of
      alliance between the St. Petersburg Committee of the Majority and a group
      of Mensheviks, but from our own people not a word. We refuse to believe
      that Bolsheviks could have taken such an imbecilic, suicidal step. We did
      “hear” from strangers about a conference of Social-Democrats
      and the formation of a “bloc”, but from our own peoplenot
      a word, although there are rumours that this is afait
      accompi.Evidently, the members of the Majority are anxious
      to be imposed
    upon again.

Ouronly strength lies in utter frankness, in solidarity, and indetermined
assault. But people, it seems, have gone soft now that we have a
“revolution”! At a time when organisation is needed a hundred times more
than ever before they sell out to the disrupters. It is evident from the proposed changes in the draft of the declaration and Congress call (set forth in
the letter so vaguely as to be almost unintelligible) that “loyalty”
has been put on a pedestal.

			       Papasba[3]actually uses that word, adding that if the
centres are not mentioned, no one will come to the Congress! Well, gentlemen, I
can wager that ift h i sis the way you are going to act, you will
never have a congress and never escape from under the thumb of the Bonapartists
of the Central Organ and the Central Committee. To call a congressagainstthe central bodies, in which lack of confidence has been
expressed, to call this Congress in the name of arevolutionarybureau
(which, if we are to pay slavish obeisance to the loyal Party Rules, is
non-existent and fictitious), and to recognise theunqualifiedright of
the nine Bonapartists, the League (ha! ha!), and the Bonapartist creatures (the
freshly hatched committees) to attend that Congress, means to make our selves
ridiculous and to lose all right to respect. The centres may and should be
invited, but to accord them voting status is, I repeat, madness. The centres, of
course, will not come toourCongress anyway; but why give them another
chance to spit in our faces? Why this hypocrisy, this game of hide-and-seek? It
is a positive shame! We bringthe splitinto the open,we call theVperyod-ists to a congress, we want to organise aVperyod-ist party, and we break immediatelyany and allconnections with the disorganisers—and yet we are having loyalty dinned
into our ears, we are asked to act as though a joint congress ofIskraandVperyodwere possible. What a farce! The very first day, the very
first hour of the Congress (if it does take place) will beyond doubt ring down
the curtain on this farce; but until the Congress meets such deceit can do us
untold harm.

Really,I sometimes think that nine-tenths of the Bolsheviks are actually
formalists. Either we shall rally all who are out to fight into a really
iron-strong organisation and with this small but strong party quash that
sprawling monster, the new-Iskramotley elements, or we shall prove
by our conduct that we deserve to go under for being contemptible
formalists. How is it that people do not understand thatprior tothe
Bureau andprior to “Vperyod”we did all we could to save
loyalty, to save unity, to save the formal, i.e., higher methods of settling the
conflict?! But now,afterthe Bureau,after
“Vperyod”, the split is a fact. And when the split had become a
fact it became evident thatmaterially we were very much weaker.We
have yet to convert our moral strength into material strength. The Mensheviks
have more money, more literature, more transportation facilities, more agents,
more “names”, and a larger staff of contributors. It would be
unpardonable childishness not to see that. And if we do not wish to present to
the world the repulsive spectacle of a dried-up and anaemic old maid, proud of
her barren moral purity, then we must understand that we need war and a battle
organisation. Only after a long battle, and only with the aid of an excellent
organisation can we turn our moral strength into material strength.

Weneed funds. The plan to hold the Congressi n   L o n d o nis sublimely ridiculous, for it would cost twice as much. We cannot
suspend publication ofVperyod, which is what a long absence
would mean. The Congress must be a simple affair, brief, and small in
attendance. This is a congress for the organisation of the
battle. Clearly, you are cherishing illusions in this respect.

Weneed people to work onVperyod.There are not enough of us. If we do
not get two or three extra people from Russiaas permanent contributors, there is no sense in continuing to prate about a
      struggle againstIskra.Pamphlets and leaflets are needed, and
    needed desperately.

Weneed young forces. I am for shooting on the spot any one who presumes to say
that there are no people to be had. The people in Russia are legion; all we have
to do is to recruit young people more widely and boldly, more boldly and
widely, and again more widely and again more boldly,without fearing
them.This is a time of war. The youth—the students, and still more
so the young workers—will decide the issue of the whole struggle. Get rid
of all the old habits of immobility, of respect for rank, and so
on.Form hundredsof circles ofVperyod-ists from among the
youth and encourage them to work at full blast. Enlarge the Committeethreefoldby accepting young people into it, set up half a dozen or a
dozen subcommittees, “co-opt” any and every honest and energetic
person. Allow every subcommittee to write and publish leaflets without any red
tape (there is no harm if they do make a mistake; we onVperyodwill
“gently” correct them). We must, with desperate speed, unite all
people with revolutionary initiative and set them to work. Do not fear their
lack of training, do not tremble at their inexperience and lack of
development. In the first place, if you fail to organise them and spur them on
to action, they will follow the Mensheviks and the Gapons, and this very
inexperience of theirs will cause five times more harm. In the second place,
events themselves will teach themin our spirit.Events are already
teaching everyone precisely in theVperyodspirit.

Onlyyou must be sure to organise, organise, and organisehundredsof
circles, completely pushing into the back ground the customary, well-meant
committee (hierarchic) stupidities. This is a time of war. Either you createnew, young, fresh, energetic battle organisations everywhere for
revolutionary Social-Democratic work of all varieties among all strata, or you
will go under, wearing the aureole of “committee” bureaucrats.

Ishall write of this inVperyod[4]and speak of it at the Congress. I am
writing to you in one moreendeavourto evokean exchange of ideas, to call upon youto bringa dozeny o u n g,  
f r e s hworkers’ (and other) circlesinto direct contactwith
the Editorial Board, although ... although between ourselves be it said, I do
not cherish the slightest hope that these daring ideas will be fulfilled,
unless, perhaps, two months from now you will ask me to wire whether I agree to
such-and-such changes in the “plan”.... I reply in advance that I
agree to everything. Good-bye until the Congress.

P.S.You must make it your aim to revolutionise the delivery ofVperyodinto Russia. Carry on widespread propaganda for subscriptions
from St. Petersburg. Let students and especiallyworkerssubscribe for
scores and hundreds of copies to be sent to their own addresses. It is absurd to
have fears on this score in times like these. The police can never intercept
all the copies. Half the number or a third will arrive, and that amounts to very
much. Suggest this idea toanyyouth circle, and it will find hundreds
of ways of its own to make connections abroad. Distribute addresses more widely,
as widely as possible, for the transmission of letters toVperyod.

[1]See present edition, Vol. 7, pp. 540-42.—Ed.

[2]The Latest News.—Ed.

[3]See Note 22.—Ed.

[4]See pp. 211-20 of this volume.—Ed.